Disposed

Shokkath Ali v. The Tamil Nadu Wakf Board

Madras HC23 Jan 2020WP/1255/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought writ of mandamus directing the Tamil Nadu Waqf Board to register a property under the Waqf Act 1995. The court directed the Board to appoint a Superintendent of Waqf Board to enquire, issue notices to interested parties, and dispose of the application within specified time.

What did the court decide?

Direction to issue notice, conduct enquiry under Section 14, and pass orders on registration by 30.04.2020.

Shokkath Ali Vs The Tamil Nadu Wakf Board — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED 23.01.2020

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN

¶5

W.P.No.1255 of 2020

¶6

Shokkath Ali ... Petitioner

¶7

..Vs..

¶8

The Tamil Nadu Waqf Board, Rep. By its Chief Executive Officer, No.1, Jaffer Syrang Street, Vallal Seethakadhi Nagar, Mannady, Chennai – 600 001. ...Respondent

¶9

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to consider the representation dated 11.10.2019 within a stipulated time and thereby register the Nawab Masjid Waqf of Girandipuram Village, Karuvambakkam Post, Tindivanam Taluk, Villupuram District under Section 36 of the Waqf Act 1995.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mrs.A.Ajimath Begam For Respondents : Mr.G.Mohamed A suji O R D E R

¶11

The petitioner has filed the present writ petition in the nature of mandamus seeking a direction to the respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 11.10.2019 and register the Nawab Masjid Waqf of Girandipuram Village, Karuvambakkam Post, Tindivanam Taluk, Villupuram District under Section 36 of the Waqf Act 1995.

¶12

In the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the petitioner has claimed that he is the person interested in the in the Waqf as defined under Section 3(k)(i) of the Waqf Act. It is stated that the Waqf Board properties are measuring about 7.6 acres. He claims that he is performing daily Namaz in the Nawab Masjid and the Masjid is maintained by a Muthawalli. It is stated that the respondent Board should register the properties of the said Waqf.

¶13

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶14

In this connection, he had made a representation on 11.10.2019 to register the Nawab Masjid Waqf of Girandipuram Village, Karuvambakkam Post, Tindivanam Taluk, Villupuram District under Section 36 of the Waqf Act 1995.

¶15

Mr.G.Mohammed A Suji, learned counsel who takes notice on behalf of the respondent states that though the Chief Executive Officer is mentioned under Section 36 of the Waqf Act, the Superintendent of Waqf Board in Villupuram District will have to make an enquiry regarding the same.

¶16

In view of the above, a direction is issued to the respondent to dispose of the representation, after issuing notice to the petitioner and to any other person interested in Waqf, calling for an enquiry, granting them permission to adduce documentary or oral evidence as require and then pass orders based on reasons on or before 30.04.2020.

¶17

With the above observations, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶18

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CO) //True Copy//

¶19

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶20

¶21

The Chief Executive Officer, Tamil Nadu Waqf Board, No.1, Jaffer Syrang Street, Vallal Seethakadhi Nagar, Mannady, Chennai – 600 001.

¶22

+1cc to Ms.A.Ajimath Begam, Advocate Sr.5168

¶23

W.P.No.1255 of 2020

¶24

rji[co] srg 27/01/2020

¶25

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Shokkath Ali v. The Tamil Nadu Wakf Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shokkath Ali v. The Tamil Nadu Wakf Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.Dhanaraj Vs The Principal Secretary

Assembly of God Church, Vs The District Collector

Gunasekaran Vs The Assistant Commissioner

B.Hariprasad, Vs The Inspector of Police

E.Muruvayee Vs The District Collector

Ariyalur Harigopal Balaji Vs Union of India